False flag in Syria now pretext for war

By Mark Luedtke

Vice President Dick Cheney told former British Prime Minister Tony Blair he wanted to invade Iraq, Syria and Iran to remake the Middle East. President Bush gave him Iraq. President Obama wants to give him Syria. This is more evidence there’s no meaningful difference between the two parties.

Secretary of State John Kerry made the case to the American people that Syrian President Bashar al Assad used chemical weapons on his own people, and therefore the U.S. must start a war with Syria. On Aug. 27, the New York Times reported, “In some of the most aggressive language used yet by the administration, Mr. Kerry accused the Syrian government of the ‘indiscriminate slaughter of civilians’ and of cynical efforts to cover up its responsibility for a ‘cowardly crime.’”

The press claimed an attack was imminent. First the attack was going to occur Thursday, Aug. 29. Then it was going to occur Saturday, Aug. 31. While Obama was playing hide-and-seek, appearing only on PBS, which nobody watches, Reuters reported Kerry doubled down on his claims.

“The United States made clear on Friday that it would punish Syrian President Bashar al Assad for the ‘brutal and flagrant’ chemical weapons attack that it says killed more than 1,400 people in Damascus last week,” Kerry said.

You would think if all this was true, since Obama announced last year that use of chemical weapons would cross a red line, Obama would have ordered an attack. But despite all the claims and threats, Obama did not order an attack. Instead, he demanded Congress give him permission. He also made the preposterous claim he didn’t need permission. I guess he’s used to having it both ways. Then Obama and Biden went golfing.

The problem for Obama is politics. Like all our bloodthirsty rulers, he wants to bomb Syria, but the American people don’t want our government to drag us into another war. Author and Antiwar.com editorial director Justin Raimondo explained: “Only nine percent of the American people support a bombing campaign. The number goes up somewhat if it is proved the Syrian government is responsible for the poison gas attack at Ghouta, and yet still a majority opposes U.S. intervention even in that case.” This is why Kerry is making the case against Assad so aggressively.

Politicians don’t care about diplomacy, alliances or national security. All they care about is increasing their power through domestic politics, and unilaterally bombing Syria is bad politics for Obama. Had he unilaterally bombed Syria, he would have owned that policy and its consequences. It would have hurt Democrats in 2014 and reduced his ability to advance his domestic agenda. So instead, he asked for Congressional approval to bait warmongering Republicans to share responsibility, and the usual cast of warmongers including John McCain and Lindsay Graham fell for it.

Compounding Obama’s problem, the British Parliament voted against attacking Syria. This was a big deal because Parliament has no power to limit the executive’s waging of war. Parliament hadn’t voted against a war since 1782, when Parliament ended the war against the American colonists against the wishes of King George.

But ultimately this political problem comes from the American people who no longer trust government, and rightly so, because the case presented by John Kerry is a lie.

Yahoo News exposed the false flag plan last January: “The Obama administration gave green signal to a chemical weapons attack plan in Syria that could be blamed on President Bashar al Assad’s regime and in turn, spur international military action in the devastated country, leaked documents have shown.”

Rebels were arrested in Turkey with Sarin gas in June. Syrian rebels told the Associated Press they had accidentally set off the chemical weapons, “‘They didn’t tell us what these arms were or how to use them,’ complained a female fighter named ‘K.’ ‘We didn’t know they were chemical weapons. We never imagined they were chemical weapons.’” Saudi Prince Bandar – a CIA operative known to favor the al Qaeda affiliate called the al Nusra Front so much they call him “the lover” – supplied the weapons to al Nusra, who in turn delivered them to naive rebels, knowing they would set them off and kill themselves and others. The accident killed 355 people according to Doctors Without Borders, not the 1,400 claimed by Kerry.

The U.S. wants to bomb Syria because it is losing its two-year-old proxy war that has killed 100,000 people. Our rulers aren’t trying to keep chemical weapons from al Qaeda. They’re supplying chemical weapons to al Qaeda through Saudi intermediaries.

Pat Buchanan asked, “Who benefits?” Not Assad. The rebels, U.S. warmongers, the Saudis and Israelis benefit. That’s why it’s no surprise the evidence Assad ordered the attack comes from a communication supposedly intercepted by Israeli, not U.S., intelligence. The U.S. tried to prevent the United Nations chemical weapons inspectors from collecting samples. Those samples have yet to be analyzed. Even Rush Limbaugh suspects it was a false flag. U.S. military officers are against this war. Americans are waking up to government’s evil. Let’s hope we can stop Congress from sanctioning Obama’s latest war.

The views and opinions expressed in Conspiracy Theorist are the views and/or opinions of the author and do not reflect the views and/or opinions of the Dayton City Paper or Dayton City Media and are published strictly for entertainment purposes only.

Mark Luedtke is an electrical engineer with a degree from the University of Cincinnati and currently works for a Dayton attorney. He can be reached at MarkLuedtke@DaytonCityPaper.com.